首页 | 本学科首页   官方微博 | 高级检索  
     检索      


Institutions,Corporate Governance and Capital Flows
Institution:1. Department of Economics, University of Texas at Austin, 2225 Speedway, Stop C3100, Austin, TX 78712, USA;2. Department of Economics, Seoul National University, 1 Gwanak-ro, Gwanak-gu, Seoul 151-746, South Korea;3. Department of Economics, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign and CAMA, 214 David Kinley Hall, 1407 W. Gregory, Urbana, IL 61801, USA;1. Department of Economics, Wake Forest University, Kirby Hall, Box 7505, Winston-Salem, NC 27109, United States;2. Department of Economics, Chinese University of Hong Kong, 914, Esther Lee Building, Chung Chi Campus, Shatin, Hong Kong;1. Bank of Canada, Canada;2. University of Notre Dame and NBER, United States;1. University of Minnesota, Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis, National Bureau of Economic Research, United States;2. University of Minnesota, Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis, United States;3. Stern School of Business, New York University, United States
Abstract:Countries with weaker domestic investor protection hold less diversified international portfolios. An equilibrium business cycle model of North-South capital flow with corporate governance frictions between outside investors and corporate insiders explains this phenomenon through two channels. First, weak governance leads to concentrated ownership in the South because international diversification by insiders is penalized by lower stock market valuation. This reduces the float portfolio, or the supply of South assets. Second, weak governance tilts the demand of South outside investors towards domestic assets to hedge labor income risk. This is due to a higher share of labor in income, which increases labor income risk. In addition, the dynamics of investment under insider control leads relative dividend and labor income to be more negatively correlated in the South, making domestic assets a better hedge against local labor income risk. I find that the insider ownership and hedging channels are responsible for at least 29% and 11%, respectively, of the cross-country variation in international diversification. Thus, weak institutions lower international diversification primarily through concentrated ownership of firms, with outsider hedging also playing a quantitatively significant role.
Keywords:
本文献已被 ScienceDirect 等数据库收录!
设为首页 | 免责声明 | 关于勤云 | 加入收藏

Copyright©北京勤云科技发展有限公司  京ICP备09084417号